Underlining the Need to Indoctrinate Our Children to Accept Islam

A/C.3/68/L.48 Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping,stigmatization, discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against persons, based on religion or belief continues by underlining the need to indoctrinate our children to tolerate intolerable intolerance.

Underlining also the importance of raising awareness about different cultures
and religions or beliefs and of education in the promotion of tolerance, which
involves the acceptance by the public of and its respect for religious and cultural
diversity, including with regard to religious expression, and underlining further the
fact that education, in particular at school, should contribute in a meaningful way to
promoting tolerance and the elimination of discrimination based on religion or
belief,

raising awareness

    There is no need for increased awareness of the existence of Islam after the Accursed Abomination of 09/11/'01. Many assert that they learned everything they needed to know about Islam on that sunny Tuesday morning. The need is for truthfulness and comprehensive detail.

acceptance of diversity

    Diversity is acceptable and accepted by most. Catholics, Jews, Methodists, Baptists, Southern Baptists and various synods of Lutherans can live and work together in our society without killing each other over doctrinal differences.  What we can not and must not be expected to accept is the existence of a war cult which asserts a divine mandate to convert, conquer, kill, enslave or subjugate & extort us.

education

    A deceptive, dishonest curriculum designed to inculcate acceptance, tolerance and respect for Islam is not education, it is indoctrination and has absolutely no place in our school system.

    The United Nations demand that we fill the heads of our children with lies so that they will tolerate and respect a system of predation which is Hellbent on enslaving them. That demand is unacceptable and must be entirely rejected. 

Tolerate Respect & Accept this: 

Racism

    Allah created the Negro Race "for the fire", they are predestined to eternal damnation, arbitrarily and capriciously.  The Islamic creation myth is clear on this matter; look it up in Mishkat Ul-Misabih if you doubt this.  Moe ordered his followers to obey the ruler, even if "an Ethiopian whose head is like a raisin" was made their ruler.

Terrorism

    Allah said: "I will cast terror", "Allah cast terror",  : "to strike terror" and  "to terrify thereby". Moe said: "I have been made victorious with terror:. Allah imputes acts of terrorism to the Muslim's credit as "deeds of righteousness".

Genocide

    Allah commanded that Moe make "great slaughter"  and kill and wound "many of them" before holding prisoners for ransom.

Intolerance

    If anyone seeks a religion other than Islam, "it will never be accepted".  Muslims are the "best of peoples" as they bring the people to Islam "with chains on their necks". According to the Hanafi madhab, disbelief (infidelity) is an evil which must be removed from the world by conversion to Islam or death.

Imperialism

    Jihad is not struggle with one's ego and temptations; nobody gets killed or kills others struggling with his ego.  Jihad is defined in Islamic law as "war against non-Muslims". Infidels may be attacked without provocation. Muslims go to Jihad or go to Hell.  The Jihad imperatives are fight... until loops whose terminal conditions are a monopoly for Allah and the subjugation and extortion of "people of the book:  Jihad is not an anachronism, it is required in every year, from 623  to  the end of the world.

Antisemitism

    "We shall knock on heaven's doors with the skulls of Jews".Allah will continually send someone to torment and humiliate the Jews. The gates of Paradise will not swing open for Muslims until they murder the last Jew. Jesus Christ will lead the Muslims in the final genocide of Jews. 

Sphere: Related Content

OIC: Playing the Victim Card - Qur'an Burning

OIC: Playing the Victim Card- Qur'an Burning The OIC propaganda machine grinds on. I accept their machinations as an opportunity to expose their al-Taqiyya.  They held an emergency meeting after International Judge the Qur'an Day.  The primary output of that meeting was a letter to Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. 

    The letter is reproduced below. Due to the target rich environment, I once again resort to footnoting.  The footnotes are linked to my commentary which follows below the horizontal line. Clicking a superscript will bring the comment into view.  After reading my comment, press the Back Space key to return to your place in the text.

A/65/802–S/2011/210

General Assembly                                                                                  Security Council
Sixty-fifth session                                                                                   Sixty-sixth year
Agenda item 68 (b)
Promotion and protection of human rights: human
rights questions, including alternative approaches for
improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and
fundamental freedoms

Letter dated 29 March 2011 from the Permanent Representative of

Tajikistan to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General

    On behalf of the Ambassadorial Group of the Organization of the Islamic
Conference in New York, I have the honour to convey that the Group held an
emergency meeting on Friday, 25 March 2011, to discuss the despicable act of the
burning of a copy of the Holy Koran¹ by two pastors, following a mock trial in a
church on 20 March 2011 in Florida, United States of America.

    This provocative act², which has hurt the sentiments of the 1.5 billion Muslims
of the world, was strongly condemned by the OIC Group as an act of advocacy of
incitement to religious hatred³, discrimination and violence⁴ against Islam and
Muslims. The OIC Ambassadors urged the international community in general and
you in particular to openly and strongly condemn this act of extreme bigotry⁵ and
religious hatred.⁶

    I am enclosing the text of the statement issued by the OIC Ambassadorial
Group in New York on this subject, with a request for circulation to the entire
United Nations membership (see annex).

    As you will see in the statement, the OIC Ambassadorial Group called upon
you, as well as reiterated the call made by the OIC Group in Geneva to the High
Commissioner for Human Rights, to express unequivocal condemnation of the
insidious desecration of the holy book⁷ of Islam and show action-oriented leadership⁸
to tackle the growing manifestations of religious intolerance and discrimination and
incitement to hatred and violence⁹ based on religion.

    The OIC Group strongly believes that the United Nations has an important role
to play in ensuring peace and harmony among the peoples and nations of the world¹⁰.
Accordingly, in your capacity as the Secretary-General of the United Nations, we
expect you to take the necessary steps to fight such insidious tendencies, to protect
multiculturalism and promote peace and harmony that are fundamental to the
peaceful coexistence of mankind¹¹.

    I should be grateful if you would have the present letter and its annex
circulated as a document of the sixty-fifth session of the General Assembly, under
agenda item 68 (b), and of the Security Council.

(Signed) Sirodjidin Aslov
Ambassador
Permanent Representative

Annex to the letter dated 29 March 2011 from the Permanent

Representative of Tajikistan to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General

Group of the Organization of the Islamic Conference in New York

strongly condemns the sacrilegious act of burning of the Holy

Koran in Florida as an act of advocacy of incitement to religious

hatred, discrimination and violence

                                                                                                        25 March 2011

    The Ambassadorial Group of the Organization of the Islamic Conference at the
United Nations, New York, at an emergency meeting convened today, expressed its
strong condemnation of the despicable act of the burning of a copy of the Koran by
Pastors Wayne Sapp and Terry Jones in Gainesville, Florida, United States of
America, on 20 March 2011. Calling it an act of extremists guided by their hatred
towards other cultures and religions, the OIC Group regretted that it took place in a
church, a sacred place itself, reserved for prayers and remembrance of God.

    The OIC Group shared the disappointment and concern expressed by the
Secretary-General of the OIC over this reprehensible act of extreme bigotry, which
has severely hurt the feelings of 1.5 billion Muslims all over the world, and
cautioned that if necessary conditions were not created by the international
community to prevent a recurrence of such Islamophobic acts, it would have grave
repercussions over interfaith harmony as well as global peace, security and stability¹².

    The Group urged the international community to unanimously condemn these
acts that are clear examples of advocacy of incitement to hatred, discrimination and
violence based on religion¹³. It was further highlighted that such acts, when left
unattended, provide fuel to extremist thoughts and elements in different societies
that lead to undermining peaceful coexistence and harmony among peoples and
societies. While appreciating the condemnatory statement issued by the United
States in the general debate of the Human Rights Council on 22 March 2011 and
other statements by interfaith and community leaders in the United States, the Group
hoped that the United States Administration would take appropriate actions against
the perpetrators of these acts in accordance with its national and international
obligations¹⁴.

    The OIC Group also called upon the Secretary-General of the United Nations
and the High Commissioner for Human Rights to express their unequivocal
condemnation of the insidious desecration of the holy book of Islam and show
action-oriented leadership to tackle the growing problem of religious intolerance¹⁵,
discrimination and incitement to hatred and violence based on religion and belief.

    The Group stated that at a time when Muslims around the world continue to be
confronted with ever-increasing instances of intolerance, negative stereotyping,
stigmatization, discrimination and violence on the basis of their religion, the OIC sponsored
resolution adopted by consensus on 24 March 2011 by the Human Rights
Council in Geneva, entitled “Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and
stigmatization of, and discrimination, incitement to violence, and violence against
persons based on religion or belief”, should be seen as the confirmation of the
sincere commitment¹⁶ of OIC to the promotion of a global culture of respect¹⁷,
tolerance and peace among all, irrespective of religious and cultural backgrounds
and traditions.

    OIC Ambassadors further reiterated the strong commitment of OIC to the
promotion of interfaith and intercultural dialogue¹⁸ and the need to preserve the
multicultural fabric of our societies that is fundamental to peaceful coexistence
among peoples, cultures and nations.

 

---

1. Pastor Wayne Sapp burned  an English translation of the meaning of the Qur'an, which Islam does not consider authentic or holy. As man's word, not Allah's, was burned,  the act was not despicable; no offense was committed.
2. As a provocation, how does judging and burning a Qur'an translation compare to the act of sacking a U.N. office, murdering ten people and burning a church?  Is the act somehow more provocative than the curse worthy content of the book, which curses^I Christians and commands Muslims to wage perpetual war^II against them? The Qur'an was burned precisely because it is a provocative book: it inculcates hatred and incites violence
3. Pastor Terry Jones judged the Qur'an, Pastor Wayne Sapp burned it. Exactly how does that constitute "advocacy of incitement to religious hatred"? Did they tell their congregants to hate Muslims?  Did they pray for the death of Muslims?  They simply examined the content of a book and its consequences, judged it to be evil and burned it.  The OIC is miscasting the act without any objective basis in fact.
4. What incitement to violence?  What violence?  Did the pastors tell their congregation to riot?  Did they riot?  Did they kill Muslims or destroy Islamic property on their way home from the church? 
5. Bigotry: closed minded persistence in false opinion in the face of the facts, commonly understood in a racial context. What race is Islam?  If Islam is a race, why are there Caucasian, African, Arabian\ and Asian, Muslims?   The pastors  heard the facts in the form of reading  verses from the book and testimony of  its victims.  They acted after consideration of  the facts brought out at trial.  How  is that bigotry?   Did they advocate hatred of or discrimination against Muslims?  Did they generalize about Muslims?  With what evidence do you  hope to substantiate your accusation of  "extreme bigotry"?
6. What is the object of hatred?  It is the damnable doctrines enshrined in the Qur'an, which sanctify & mandate genocidal^III conquest^II & terrorism^IV.  Exactly what is wrong with hatred of absolute evil?
7. How can the profane be desecrated?  They burned a translation, not an Arabic Qur'an.  Even the Arabic Qur'an is profane, not sacred to those who examine it objectively.  The Qur'an consists largely of situational scripture^V and its mission is mercenary^VI. 
8. Condemnation is verbiage, not action. The real demand is for legislation to impose Islam's blasphemy law^VII on us; to make questioning & criticism of Islam punishable by fine and imprisonment. 
9. The usual code word is Islamophobia.  Take a look at the March edition of the Islamophobia Observatory^VIII and see what they are kvetching about.  They consider the House Homeland Security Cmte. hearing into 'radicalization' as 'incitement to discrimination... .
10. The UN was created to maintain peace; prevent war. Islam was created to initiate and perpetuate war^II,VI. To fulfill its mission, the UN must eliminate Islam from the world. 
11. That distills down to: promote surrender to Islam. Peace is what pertains after Dar ul-Islam conquers Dar ul-Harb.
12. That distills down to a threat: "silence our critics or we will go to war". 
13. The sentence is redundant boilerplate.  The Qur'an was burned precisely because it inculcates hatred and incites genocidal violence. They accuse us of their own course of conduct (they obey Allah & emulate Muhammad). 
14. The United States is obligated to protect the rights of its citizens.  We have a right to truthful communication of information, including information about the content and consequences of Islam's damnable scripture. Their demand that Jones & Sapp be punished for exercising their first amendment rights is parallel to their oft repeated demand that the creators of the Motoons & Fitna be punished for communicating the truth about their curse worthy war cult. 
15. So, religious intolerance is a problem?  Is it really?? The Qur'an defines Islam, and it ain't tolerant!  Islam is extremely intolerant! Allah  says that only Islam will be accepted^IX.  Anyone who tries to quit Islam is to be killed^X. Cursing us and mandating war against us are not signs of tolerance.  They are demanding that we tolerate the propagation of a doctrine which demands that we be conquered^II and declares open season^XI on us.
16. Sincere commitment to tolerance & peace? Yeah, right. Egypt, Indonesia & Pakistan are so committed to peace & tolerance that they allow Muslims to subject Christians to assault, murder, malicious persecution & destruction of property with impunity. 
17. Respect is given where respect is due, we have to earn it; so do you. Islam is unworthy of respect; reasonable men will give it none.
18. If you are so committed to interfaith dialogue, why did you not send someone to International Judge the Koran Day to act as defense counsel and present evidence to prove that it does not inculcate hatred, incite war and institutionalize misogyny?

1. 2:161, 9:30
2. 8:39, 9:29, The Order to fight People of the Scriptures until They give the Jizyah.  9:123
3. 8:67, 47:4
4. 3:151,  8:12, 8:57, 8:60, 8:60, 59:13, Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220
5. http://missbeth.wordpress.com/2007/06/04/know-thine-enemy-part-7-2/
6. https://snooper.wordpress.com/author/dajjal/page/2009/08/30/islams-mercenary-mission/
7. http://www.islamicbulletin.com/free_downloads/resources/reliance_complete.pdf#page=614
8. http://www.oic-oci.org/uploads/file/Islamphobia/2011/en/MB_Mar-11.pdf#page=19
9. 3:85 
10. 4:89
11. Sahih Bukhari 1.8.387

Sphere: Related Content

Respect for Religious Differences?

The impetus for the present diatribe came from this article publiched by the U.S. Mission tyo the UN in Geneva.
Promoting Respect for Religious Differences By Suzanne Nossel, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Bureau of International Organization Affairs.

Our government is engaged in subtle, highly polished dissembling. In order to point out the clever lies, I have reproduced excerpts from the article in block quote format, with Helvetica or Arial type face, interspersed with my commentary. I have added bold font emphasis to make the lies easier to spot.

Take a close look at the title of the article, in bold blue text above. Do you spot the lie? The article is about a counter proposal offered as a substitute for the OIC's campaign to outlaw criticism of Islam. It is not about respecting differences, it is about respecting Islam. When the differences between Christianity and Islam are considered, the differences are so stark that respect is impossible.

Christians believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God, sent to save sinners through acceptance of God's grace. We believe that he was crucified, died and was resurrected. Muslims believe that Isa, their name for Jesus, was fully human, Allah's slave, not God's son, was not crucified, neither died nor resurrected and will return as a genocidal warlord who will lead the Muslim army in its final conquest, exterminating the Jews. How in Hell can any sentient person exepct us to respect that blasphemy? The details, for those who don't know, are documented in The Defamation of Jesus Christ.

Over the last decade, we have witnessed a campaign to attempt to counter religious hatred through bans on speech under the rubric of prohibitions on the “defamation of religions.” This effort has taken root in a series of resolutions at the U.N.’s General Assembly in New York and its Human Rights Council in Geneva.

Far from attempting to counter religious hatred, the OIC, as the representative of Islam in the absence of a Caliphate, is acting out religious hatred by attempting to impose Islam's blasphemy law upon the entire world through the agency of the United Nations. Religious hatred is not the issue. Defamation is not the issue. Proscribing defamation by law would not reduce hatred in any case, it would only cause it to fester. Take a close look at Islamic law, quoted from Reliance of the Traveller, Book O.

• O8.7: Acts that Entail Leaving Islam
• -4- to revile Allah or His messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace);
• -5- to deny the existence of Allah, His beginingless eternality, His endless eternality, or to deny any of His attributes which the consensus of Muslims ascribes to Him (dis: v1);
• -6- to be sarcastic about Allah's name, His command, His interdiction, His promise, or His threat;
• -7- to deny any verse of the Koran or anything which by scholarly consensus (def: b7) belongs to it, or to add a verse that does belong to it;

• -16- to revile the religion of Islam;

• -19- to be sarcastic about any ruling of the Sacred Law;

• O11.10 The agreement is also violated (A: with respect to the offender alone) if the state has stipulated that any of the following things break it, and one of the subjects does so anyway, though if the state has not stipulated that these break the agreement, then they do not; namely, if one of the subject people:

• -3- leads a Muslim away from Islam;

• -5- or mentions something impermissible about Allah, the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), or Islam.

The penalty for apostasy is death.

• O8.1 When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.
• O8.2 In such a case, it is obligatory for the caliph (A: or his representive) to ask him to repent and return to Islam. If he does, it is accepted from him, but if he refuses, he is immediately killed.

The code in O11.10 refers to the treaty of protection afforded to conquered Jews, Christians & Zoroastrians who, as an alternative to conversion to Islam, make annual payments of tribute and exist under conditions of humiliation & subjection. When a dhimmi violates those rules, the caliph can kill him at will.

Islam's Hellbent determination to impose its blasphemy law on us is not about defamation, it is about supremacism. Islam claims to have a monopoly on divine truth, all else is false. They are attempting to impose through "international law" what they can not yet impose by force of arms.

Some U.N. member states supportive of these resolutions are banding together to try to impose a global ban on offensive speech in the form of a binding instrument under international law.

Any criticism of Allah, Moe & their doctrines & practices is offensive to Islam. The prime examples they cite are the Motoons and Fitna:. Although the most famous of the cartoons depicts an explosive device, which Moe never had in his possession, he was, by his own admission, a terrorist.

The irony of this effort is that the concept of “defamation of religion” has been used to crack down on religious minorities that espouse beliefs deemed by the State to defame a national or majority-supported religion. Moreover, many of the countries that support the defamation of religion apply the concept to protect one religion only, and are — within their own countries — accepting of hostile language and acts that target minority faiths.

Irony? No, that is the intended result, not a misapplication. Defamation of Islam is a shibboleth created for political purposes, not a real and substantive issue.

These contradictions demonstrate that the drive to impose a global ban on offensive speech will not protect members of all religions on an equal basis, as U.N. resolutions and international legal norms must do. Nor will they address the specific and legitimate concerns about the treatment and mistreatment of Muslim minorities globally. Concerns about the treatment of Muslim minorities warrant concerted action on the international stage, but through steps and measures that actually work, rather than bans on free speech.

Equality of application would not make Islam's blasphemy laws acceptable. If you shield Judiasm, Christianity and other religions from criticism along with Islam, you still make it impossible to accurately identify and characterize the implaccable foe who has declared and is prosecuting war against us. Had Hitler declared Mein Kampf to be divine revelation and National Socialism to be a religion, we would not have been able to use those propaganda posters in WW2 under the proposed regime. The intent is, that in George Washington's words: “If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”[http://www.georgewashingtonsociety.org/Mission.html]

What legitimate concerns? We have laws against assault & harassment. It is not Muslims who are being murdered, raped, tortured and burned out of their homes, businesses and churches in Egypt,.Indonesia & Pakistan.

It is not mythical assaults and murders they seek to prevent, it is revelation & recognition of the truth about Islam: that it is a war cult which seeks to destroy western civilization and plunge the world into theocratic tyranny. Measures to promote that objective are undesirable, whether or not they are effective.

The United States has worked strenuously to oppose defamation-based approaches on the basis that they are inconsistent with fundamental freedoms of speech and expressions, including the values endorsed by U.N. member states through the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The United States has given lip service to the concept of freedom of expression, but, in October of '09, the State Department co-sponsored the Freedom of Opinion and Expression resolution, which substitutes "negative stereotyping" for "defamation", a distinction without a difference.

As an alternative to the efforts that would ban speech in order to prohibit “defamation of religion,” we are proposing to achieve the goal of promoting religious pluralism and acceptance of religious difference through the kinds of steps that we have seen be effective in our own country and across the globe: enactment and enforcement of laws prohibiting discrimination; bans on hate crimes; education, training and dialogue to promote religious tolerance.

Get a clue.

• 3:85. And whoever seeks a religion other than Islâm, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers.
• 9:30. And the Jews say: 'Uzair (Ezra) is the son of Allâh, and the Christians say: Messiah is the son of Allâh. That is a saying from their mouths. They imitate the saying of the disbelievers of old. Allâh's Curse be on them, how they are deluded away from the truth!

Islam's scripture says that we are going to Hell and curses us in addition to declaring perpetual war against us. Religious pluralism? Acceptance?? In your dreams!! Why would anyone desire to promote tolerance of a "religion" which sanctifies and mandates genocidal conquest & terrorism? Tolerance must be reciprocal; Islam is not tolerant. The two ayat quoted above prove this fact without any room for doubt.

Islam is a predator; We are prey. For the sake of safety, we must be allowed to truthfully discuss Islam. The Ad Hoc Committee will meet again in March.. We do not know how long it will take them to produce their protocol to ICERD, but I have no doubt that, barring a miracle, President Obama or his successor will sign it and the Senate will ratify it.

Sphere: Related Content